Home Office

College of Policing Annual Report and Accounts 2019 – 2020

Baroness Williams of Trafford: My hon Friend the Minister of State for Crime and Policing (Kit Malthouse) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement:I am today publishing the 2019-20 annual report and accounts for the College of Policing Limited [HC 987]. This will be laid before the House and published on www.gov.uk. The report will also be available in the Vote Office.

Offensive Weapons Act 2019 Surrender and Compensation Scheme

Baroness Williams of Trafford: My hon Friend the Minister of State for Crime and Policing (Kit Malthouse) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement:The Offensive Weapon Act 2019 Surrender and Compensation Scheme commences today. This is an important part of the Government’s response to tackling serious violence and keeping dangerous weapons off our streets. The scheme is being run in advance of the Government commencing the prohibitions relating to rapid firing rifles and certain knives and other offensive weapons provided for by the Offensive Weapons Act 2019. The scheme allows for the surrender to the police of certain knives such as zombie knives and cyclone knives, other offensive weapons, rapid firing rifles and their ancillary equipment and bump stocks. The arrangements apply in England and Wales and extend to Scotland and Northern Ireland with respect to firearms and ancillary equipment only. The lawful owners of these items will be able to claim financial compensation in most cases. The scheme will run for 3 months between 10 December 2020 and 9 March 2021 inclusive. I will place in the Libraries of both Houses a copy of the guidance to the public on the scheme, the claims form, a standard values list of compensation that will be paid for surrendered weapons and a list of designated police stations in every force where weapons can be surrendered. These documents are being made available to the public on gov.uk.

Ministry of Justice

Update to Government response to the Prison Service Pay Review Body recommendations 20/21

Baroness Scott of Bybrook: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Justice (Lucy Frazer QC) has made the following Written Statement."I am today making a further and final announcement on the government’s response to this year’s recommendations from the Prison Service Pay Review Body.The Prison Service Pay Review Body (PSPRB) reported to Government with its 2020-21 pay award recommendations earlier this summer, and on 21 July, the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice was pleased to announce the Government’s acceptance of six out of the seven recommendations. This has already delivered an above inflation pay rise of at least 2.5% for all prison staff, with cumulative awards of up to 7.5% where progression pay is taken into account.The PSPRB report also included a recommendation (“recommendation 3”) to make a further overall increase of £3,000 for ‘Band 3’ prison staff on modernised terms and conditions, intended to have effect from September 2020. For staff at this grade, this would represent a rise of between 14 and 21%. This group represents around one third of the prison service workforce. This recommendation presents clear affordability challenges due to its exceptional cost and is also out of step with other public sector workforces. The Government therefore committed to considering the recommendation in more detail.Since the initial announcement, the Ministry of Justice, together with HM Treasury, has considered further the exceptional costs associated with implementing this recommendation, the impact on the overall pay structure, and the changing labour market conditions due to the exceptional economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.Changes in the labour market as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the unpredictable changing state of the economy means that the assumptions made by the PSPRB upon which they based their recommendations have now changed.The Department has also considered if any associated workforce reforms could be delivered alongside the recommendation which would create efficiencies and savings, and therefore deliver value for money by offsetting some of the cost of the recommendation. This was undertaken with a view to possible discussions with recognised trade unions, should an option for affordable delivery of the recommendation, which could offer value for money for taxpayers, be identified. The conclusion is that sufficient savings required to offer value for money could not be achieved, meaning the recommendation remains unaffordable.It has therefore been decided not to accept “recommendation 3”.Nonetheless, this is the third year in a row that prison staff have benefitted from an award of at least 2% - which delivers an above inflation increase.I would like to reiterate my thanks to the PSPRB for their independent expertise, insight and rigour through which they have developed this year’s report. While the Government has not accepted the entirety of the PSPRB recommendations for 20/21, the Department remains committed to working with the review body and we will also continue to work closely with recognised trade unions.The Chancellor has outlined that in the interest of fairness, pay rises in the public sector will be restrained and targeted for the coming year (2021/22), whilst also ensuring an uplift for lower earning staff who need it most. I will be shortly writing to the Chair of the PSPRB to seek their independent advice on the prison pay for 2021/22, in line with the Chancellor’s statement.I am also, above all, immensely grateful for the hardworking public servants who are critical to the delivery of safe and secure running of our prisons. While the wider circumstances are unpredictable, I remain committed to supporting staff in our prison service, who work hard to help those who are the most vulnerable in our society while keeping the public safe."

Cabinet Office

The European Union (Withdrawal) Act & Common Frameworks Report

Lord True: My Hon. Friend, the Minister of State for the Constitution and Devolution (Chloe Smith MP) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement:I am today laying before Parliament a report, ‘The European Union (Withdrawal) Act and Common Frameworks: 26 June 2020 to 25 September 2020’. I am laying this report because it is a legal requirement under the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018 for quarterly reports to be made to Parliament on the progress of the work to develop common frameworks. The report is available on Gov.uk and details the progress made between the UK Government and devolved administrations regarding the development of common frameworks. This report details progress made during the ninth 3-month reporting period, and sets out that no ‘freezing’ regulations have been brought forward under section 12 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act. A copy of the ‘The European Union (Withdrawal) Act and Common Frameworks: 26 June 2020 to 25 September 2020 report has been placed in the library of both Houses. The publication of the report reflects the Government’s continued commitment to transparency. EU (Withdrawal) Act & Common Frameworks Report (pdf, 1463.5KB)

Department of Health and Social Care

Update following Private Notice Question on the COVID-19: Transparency and accuracy of statistics

Lord Bethell: During the Private Notice Question on the COVID-19: Transparency and accuracy of statistics tabled by Lord Lilley on 9 November 2020, I was asked by Lord Lamont about a graph from the No10 presentation, specifically the one with four long term scenarios for daily deaths from COVID-19. I told the House that this graph had a presentational error in it, and I would like to correct the record. There were no presentational errors with this graph. The graphs from the press conference of 31 October with presentational errors in them were the projections of deaths and hospitalisations over the next six weeks, different graphs to the ones he referred to. This error only affected the visualisation of the confidence intervals (blue shaded area) and the upper bound was too high. The central projection was unaffected. As I said, these were corrected as soon as possible. I reassured him that the data upon which decisions were made and the data that went into the central projections of that amended charts were correct, and the fact that we have changed it demonstrates that we are committed to transparency in all these matters. This remains correct.